Does Christian privilege exist in the UK? If so why and what impact does it have?

[SilverBirchWithout]

This idea came up during a discussion in Site Stuff earlier today, where it was suggested it might be more helpful to start a specific thread.

There is strong evidence that Christian privilege exists. Christian views and values pervade our law making, education system, and bank holidays without a doubt. But what about the way society and our upbringing teaches us to recognise and respect people with a faith, at what point is deference to someone's belief damaging to the rights of someone who doesn't share those views?

I personally identify as generally an atheist with strong personal values, a spiritual nature (but not involving any deities or woo) and a mixture of non-conformist influences from my childhood.

I'm genuinely interested in the whole idea of Christian privilege and welcome anyone's views.

I feel very privileged to be a Christian. I am so grateful to have a Christian Faith and that is its own reward.

While there may be some advantages for Christians, this is offset by "persecution". The advantages Christians receive are equally applicable to and shared with non-Christians.

Some people on MN seem to believe that 'Christian privilege' was suddenly inflicted on the country in recent years.

The country has been Christian for about 1500 years!

Gin can you share what those advantages non-Christians share?

Do they offset some of the disadvantages, like Briiicks lack of bodily autonomy?

Abraid that's an interesting point, Christian privilege and sometimes persecution of those not conforming to the established view of the Church at the time, has existed for a very long time. That might be why it is sometimes hard to recognise it as such.

I'm out for the day so will not be able to post any responses until later.

All the stuff the non-Christians have been moaning about, lol.

"The advantages Christians receive are equally applicable to and shared with non-Christians."

Like what?

Abraid- I made that point earlier. It is only very recently that Christians have had to start to accept that they don't merit special treatment- and that must sometimes feel like being disadvantaged. When it's just equality.

with the exception of compulsory worship in schools and the existence/funding of faith schools, it really isn't that bad in the UK (the problem in Ireland has been referenced up thread)

a lot will change when HMQ turns up her toes - she is a believer but the heirs are clearly only paying lip-service to keep her happy. She's been around so long that no-one dares change anything, even though her powers are now largely ceremonial. But I think we have much more chance of going secular under the next king.

hopefully that will remove state-embedded religion,while still allowing freedom of worship.

Special We cannot go secular whilst a monarchy without putting the royal powers in the hands of another, ie the prime minister. I think the current system works very well, where the Queen is allowed all the power as long as she does what she is told.
Beware of demanding a secular government, the US has had one from the start, but has not elected a leader who does not actively promote his strong christian beliefs.

Read this thread, BR. The atheists have listed them!

his is offset by "persecution

You've been persecuted in the uk? Or has someone just made you feel a bit silly at a dinner party? I do wish Christians wouldn't use the word persecution when they just been 'someone upset me just like we all get upset by people sometimes'.

Persecution in inverted commas. Obviously no torture or imprisonment. But there are plenty of Christians mocked for their faith or compelled to act contrary to their faith, or even lose their jobs.

We were warned in the Bible of this happening.

"But there are plenty of Christians mocked for their faith or compelled to act contrary to their faith, or even lose their jobs."

Some of us might call that" being asked to do all the tasks itemized in the job description they agreed to when taking the job" and "adhering to the law of the land"

Some people might think that, but it is not the black and white situation you would no doubt like to portray.

The law of the land can be quite discriminating towards people of faith. The law also restricts Sunday opening hours, which non-Christians complain about, so they do like to cherry-pick which laws are just and which are unjust.

"The law of the land can be quite discriminating towards people of faith."

In what way?

There have been a couple of highly publicised cases in recent years - B & B -gate and Birthday Cake -gate.

Citing those cases as examples of discrimination against Christians only supports the view that to be Christian is to be homophobic. A view I don't hold, incidentally......

The "clients" could simply have taken their business elsewhere. Their human rights and quality of life were not diminished.

Instead, they were coerced by activists to make a point and drive these families out of business.

Bit tricky if you've rocked up at a B&B you've booked to suddenly find you weren't welcome.

The cake one though seems to have been done simply to make a point, and makes me very uncomfortable about the rights of people to hold differing opinions. I think there is a difference between the cases.

Is being homophobic a central tenet of Christianity?

I think the B&B was targeted to make a point too - in a place where there were loads of B&Bs.

Christian definition of marriage/sexual relations.

I don't know any Christians who are activists against homosexual relations, and therefore. homophobic, but equally don't appreciate having their faces rubbed in it.
Most Christians will hold the view that sexuality is not a choice.

I think Christians have much stronger views on the conduct of heterosexual relationships, where there is an element of choice.

"but equally don't appreciate having their faces rubbed in it"

By being expected to adhere to the Equality Legislation?

Well, if the point was that homophobia is unacceptable, I'm all behind that.

They could have gone somewhere else? Wow.

There is a concept of living and let live.

If a Christian B&B owner is targeted by activist organisations, even when there is alternative accommodation in the area, and even when they offered a twin room instead of a double, it could be seen as persecution for their faith. They had to give up their business because the law did not respect their values and activists decided to exploit.

You might not see this as persecution for their faith. They certainly did.

And can I mention the case of BA employee not allowed to wear a cross?

How about if they hadn't wanted a mixed race couple staying? Should they have just found somewhere else? After all, there were plenty of other B&Bs.

Is refusing to associate with gay people a central tenet of Christiantiy?

Oh and yes, you can mention the BA employee, who like all other BA employees was asked not to wear visible jewellery with her uniform.

Is wearing a visible cross a central tenet of Christiantiy?